Space Debris Has Hit and Damaged the International Space Station (sciencealert.com) 38
A user shares a report from ScienceAlert: The inevitable has occurred. A piece of space debris too small to be tracked has hit and damaged part of the International Space Station -- namely, the Canadarm2 robotic arm. The instrument is still operational, but the object punctured the thermal blanket and damaged the boom beneath. It's a sobering reminder that the low-Earth orbit's space junk problem is a ticking time bomb. Canadarm2 -- formally known as the Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS), designed by the Canadian Space Agency -- has been a fixture on the space station for 20 years. It's a multi-jointed titanium robotic arm that can assist with maneuvering objects outside the ISS, including cargo shuttles, and performing station maintenance.
It's unclear exactly when the impact occurred. The damage was first noticed on 12 May, during a routine inspection. NASA and the CSA worked together to take detailed images of and assess the damage. "Despite the impact, results of the ongoing analysis indicate that the arm's performance remains unaffected," the CSA wrote in a blog post. "The damage is limited to a small section of the arm boom and thermal blanket. Canadarm2 is continuing to conduct its planned operations." Robotics operations on the ISS using the Canadarm2 will continue as planned for the near future, the CSA said. But both space agencies will continue to gather data in order to perform an analysis of the event, both to understand how it occurred, and to assess future risk.
It's unclear exactly when the impact occurred. The damage was first noticed on 12 May, during a routine inspection. NASA and the CSA worked together to take detailed images of and assess the damage. "Despite the impact, results of the ongoing analysis indicate that the arm's performance remains unaffected," the CSA wrote in a blog post. "The damage is limited to a small section of the arm boom and thermal blanket. Canadarm2 is continuing to conduct its planned operations." Robotics operations on the ISS using the Canadarm2 will continue as planned for the near future, the CSA said. But both space agencies will continue to gather data in order to perform an analysis of the event, both to understand how it occurred, and to assess future risk.
Kessler syndrome is looming ahead (Score:1)
It will be spectacular!
Re:Kessler syndrome is looming ahead (Score:5, Informative)
An unfamiliar name so I looked it up. From Wikipedia "The Kessler syndrome (also called the Kessler effect, collisional cascading, or ablation cascade, proposed by NASA scientist Donald J. Kessler in 1978, is a theoretical scenario in which the density of objects in low Earth orbit (LEO) due to space pollution is high enough that collisions between objects could cause a cascade in which each collision generates space debris that increases the likelihood of further collisions One implication is that the distribution of debris in orbit could render space activities and the use of satellites in specific orbital ranges difficult for many generations." Whether or not the Kessler syndrome is near or not the light pollution from thousands of communications satellites will end ground based astronomy before much longer. Most planets seem to have rings around them so the Earth will likely have one sometime in the future from orbital trash we put up there. I wonder if it should be included in exoplanet surveys as a likely signature for space-fairing civilizations.
Re: Kessler syndrome is looming ahead (Score:1)
Most planets seem to have rings around them so the Earth will likely have one sometime in the future from orbital trash we put up there.
And somehow all that debris, after playing the most chaotic game of billiards, is supposed to end up in the exact same orbit??
Perhaps that's not how rings are formed.
Re:Kessler syndrome is looming ahead (Score:4, Insightful)
Doesn't sound like that big a deal (Score:3, Insightful)
They don't know when it happened - they only discovered it during a routine inspection, and there doesn't appear to be any functional change (if there was, they'd likely know when this happened).
The story seems unnecessarily alarmist, even if you're concerned about (what I think is) a very real problem with space junk. Ever hear about the boy who cried wolf?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What worries me is that they didn't know about it while still having the arm in use several times.
This time it was small and negligible. What if it was larger and caused a complete failure of the arm during operation. Like when a bearing got smashed or some hydraulics got damaged maybe? Making the arm go in a wrong direction uncontrollable while operating it. Could easily cause more damage to other parts of the station.
I would propose they hang much more camera's all over the place and do some automated ima
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
One would hope that the arm has onboard diagnostics and can detect undesired operation.
Re: (Score:3)
They don't know when it happened - they only discovered it during a routine inspection, and there doesn't appear to be any functional change (if there was, they'd likely know when this happened).
The story seems unnecessarily alarmist, even if you're concerned about (what I think is) a very real problem with space junk. Ever hear about the boy who cried wolf?
the "story" just recounts exactly what you said, which is just factual information. how is this being alarmist or crying wolf?
it is a real problem and won't get away just by ignoring it.
Re:Doesn't sound like that big a deal (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a sobering reminder that the low-Earth orbit's space junk problem is a ticking time bomb.
This would be the alarmist part.
Re: (Score:3)
that's a pretty much apt metaphor imo. it doesn't predict doom but highlights that the issue is not really fully under control. bad things can happen at any moment until we find a definitive solution for this, yet we keep shooting junk up there.
maybe it isn't any really serious direct hazard to us down on earth ... except we might have to manage without satellites for a while. but that's not going to be trivial, could potentially be really nasty and, yeah, many would call that metaphorically "a bomb".
Re: (Score:2)
Have you? [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The story seems unnecessarily alarmist, even if you're concerned about (what I think is) a very real problem with space junk.
This has become the norm for almost every "news" story these days. The trend towards everything becoming clickbait is accelerating, unfortunately.
Re: (Score:2)
"Clickbait news stories proliferating at an alarming rate says Slashdot enthusiast PoE! Is the Internet as we know it doomed????"
Re: (Score:2)
They don't know when it happened - they only discovered it during a routine inspection, and there doesn't appear to be any functional change (if there was, they'd likely know when this happened).
The story seems unnecessarily alarmist, even if you're concerned about (what I think is) a very real problem with space junk. Ever hear about the boy who cried wolf?
And why exactly would you attempt to label this a Boy-Who-Cried-Wolf problem? Is this the latest story in a barrage of clickbait bullshit being pimped by the MSM for the third time this week? If you think this is a "very real" problem, then what exactly is your problem of the news stations talking about it on the rare occasion that it occurs?
When an object like that could have easily flown through the main fuselage (or an astronaut/cosmonauts skull), it's kind of a big deal even when near catastrophes hap
Only matter of time statistically. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's only a matter of time statistically. It may never happen soon and it may happen sooner than expected. Without force fields (shields) like we see in science fiction or more down to earth, an "iron dome"' [wikipedia.org], something bigger will eventually cause the complete loss of a space station like this one.
It doesn't necessarily have to be space debris, it could be meteorites or anything else traveling through space at tremendous speeds.
Let's face it, currently the space station doesn't have any other alternatives than modifying its orbit trajectory to avoid collisions and it's a rather kind of slow solution where you have to know and plan in advance.
Re: (Score:2)
It's gonna have to be point defense because we only have an idea of how to make deflector shields for [certain types of] energy, not for objects.
However, point defense wouldn't have worked here because the object wasn't being tracked...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Again? (Score:5, Funny)
Man, they're having no luck with that arm. Why, just three days ago I was reading about something very similar to this happening. What are the odds? /s
Re: (Score:3)
No luck?
''has been a fixture on the space station for 20 years.''
How many tools does the average consumer have that are functional, mission critical and that are 20 years old? Granted, not a fair comparison, but still. I'd guess better engineering than luck. Surely the ''next gen'' will even improve.
Re:Again? (Score:4, Informative)
He's complaining about this being a dupe, not that it has actually happened twice in three days.
Re: (Score:3)
How many tools does the average consumer have that are functional, mission critical and that are 20 years old?
"Bob, have you seen my robotic arm?"
"No, Bill, I haven't touched it - pretty sure you were the last one who used it. Where did you see it last?"
"It was right there on the station when I adjusted one of the solar panels a couple days ago."
"Could you have left it on the Russian side?"
"No, I haven't been over there since the cute cosmonaut left. Man, I hope someone from the Dragon didn't borrow it before they left - getting it back is gonna be a pain."
"You always lose that thing. I keep saying you should make
Re: (Score:2)
I'd send this via a direct route if possible.
Fucking hilarious. Great post.
Re: (Score:3)
Man, they're having no luck with that arm. Why, just three days ago I was reading about something very similar to this happening. What are the odds? /s
Despite the frequency of dupes around here, I can find no record of this having been posted before. [slashdot.org]
I have a solution. (Score:5, Funny)
How about a second Canadarm and a goalie's catching glove, eh?
Re:I have a solution. (Score:5, Funny)
Space Treaties (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Classifying it as debris suggests a man-made source...
A quick dictionary check [merriam-webster.com] does not support a theory that debris must be man-made. For example, tornados and geologic erosion are both common sources of debris.
Rake that debris (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Comb the desert!
Sounds like a job for... (Score:2)
Duct tape!
Looking forward to the space walk where NASA applies what is an extremely cheap repair to an extremely expensive piece of equipment.
Re: (Score:1)
Sticky tape has a long history in the space program. I have a dim memory of an emergency repair to a booster on the launch pad in the 1960s.
space debris or micrometeoroid? (Score:2)
Why is it assumed it's space debris? Was it identified as man made?
Hard to believe it took this long (Score:1)